Assessment of length of stay and cost of minimally invasive versus open thymectomies in patients with myasthenia gravis in Florida

Background: Thymectomy has become a standard component in treatment for myasthenia gravis. The best surgical approach is still subject to debate. Minimally invasive surgery may have a lower mortality and morbidity rate, improved cosmetic results, and equivalent efficacy at improving neurologic symptoms to open approaches. We compared the perioperative outcomes and cost between the two techniques. Methods: We queried Florida Inpatient Discharge Dataset for patients who underwent thymectomy and had a primary diagnosis of non-thymomatous myasthenia gravis using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes to carry out this retrospective cohort study. The dates ranged between January 1 51 , 2013, to December 31 51 , 2018. We compared outcomes of patients who underwent minimally invasive thymectomy versus those who had open thymectomy. Results: An open approach was used in 108 patients, whereas a minimally invasive approach was used in 40 patients. Minimally invasive surgery group had a shorter length of stay (3.0 vs. 6.0 days, P<0.001) and had a non-significant lower total cost ($18.4K vs. $22.1K, P=0.186). Aker adjusting for age and Elixhauser score, length of stay for minimally invasive group was 32% (P=0.01) lower compared to the open surgery group. Conclusions: Patients who underwent minimally invasive thymectomy for Myasthenia gravis had a significantly shorter length of stay and a lower, although not significant, overall cost.

Automated summary

This study compared the perioperative outcomes and cost between open thymectomy and minimally invasive thymectomy for myasthenia gravis. The results showed that patients who underwent minimally invasive thymectomy had a significantly shorter length of stay and a lower, although not significant, overall cost.